About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
enforcement one of the reasons why the obama administration embraced it, but it's all about how these things are represented and what they're obligated to say when your pants down. do you believe in enforcing these laws been problematic are not? and when you say -- the whole idea of the. >> translator: is that these aren't the good kids. many -- i think they're right. it doesn't mean that they're a bad kid. community college or maybe you have got in trouble when you're a teenager. i think there is something very disingenuous about the debate we have around us, but of course that is because advocates of destruction debate in the certain white. this is rooted in any kind of believes that our prior to the way that we actually structure the conversation. i think that advocates have structured the conversation very advantageous sleep. >> a couple more questions in the month to cut off. i was wondering if you could and testimonials in terms of looking forward toward the democratic party strength. >> and also the gentleman over there. >> thank you. thanks to the forum today. the panelists. i can gi
for the obama administration in the budget office. >> bill: former presidential candidate and speaker of the house, newt gingrich announc jo. >> greta: the headlines, "obama comes to new york for barbara walters, and sort of u.n." why isn't he meeting with anybody? >> i think it's a comment on the depth of his arrogance. i think this is a person that doesn't care what the world thinks, doesn't care what the american people thinks. if he gets re-elected, he'll be right and the rest of us will be wrong. i mean, his view is all about a cynical, calculated approach. "the view" gets him more votes than meeting with 10 or 15 world leaders. and the fact that he's not doing his job is irrelevant. you have to divide it into two parts. there's winning the office and there is actually being president. he's clearly said if i can win the office, i don't care what the rest of you think. let me say, what should really deeply bother americans is how does all this play out in the rest of the world? imagine you were an ambassador trying to explain to the president of egypt or the president of china or
, then. for 10 days after the banghazi attack, the obama administration denied it was a terrorist attack. >> bill: that's a different issue. >> after carney said that morning, okay, now everybody concedes it's a terrorist attack, the same afternoon obama went back to the, oh, it's really caused by the film. i think it's because he wasn't coordinating. >> bill: he was talking about the film today, which is sort of interesting, talking about the video before the u.n. in his speech, talking about how we don't insult -- we should not tolerate insulting religions, yet there was no mention of the fact that ahmadinejad is going to be speaking tomorrow on the holiest day of the jewish faith, yom kippur. he spoke about the insult to the muslim world with this video, but neglected to talk about the insult to jews, while he's diss the prime minister of israel. >> it's worse than that. obama spent three photographs on a -- three paragraphs on the nut cake film that nobody has seen. why is obama fixated on appeasing muslims while attacking catholics? why is that not a topic that ought to be on every
court is now back in session for the first time since it ruled on the obama administration's landmark health care law last june. so how might mitt romney change the high court if he becomes president of the united states? he's already giving all of us some major clues. let's bring in cnn's crime and justice correspondent joe johns who's taking a closer look. what are you seeing? >> the supreme court doesn't get talked about that much on the campaign trail. but choosing a justice is one of the most important things a president does. it's how on administration puts its mark on some of the nation east toughest, most divisive issues. and we have a look at how mitt romney might handle it if he's president. whenever mitt romney fielded questions during the primaries about his picks for the supreme court, he was armed with a stock republican answer. >> what i would look to do would be to appoint people to the supreme court that will follow strictly the constitution as opposed to to legislating from the bench. >> reporter: but he wouldn't choose a favorite. >> would you pick one, please? >> y
to provide for themselves and their families. i think that is why the obama administration's objective is essentially using bread and circuses to make as many people as possible dependent on government, to keep voting democratic, is not succeeding. americans want to stand on their own feet. >> that is the craziest thing i ever heard of my life. you are accusing the president of united states of using a government program to manipulate people do not get a job, to be dependent on the government for services? impressed. we are a few minutes and -- >> let me finish. pressed we're a few minutes and and you have now three times call me crazy on observing that the president has expanded government dependency. >> you are saying he is manipulating american civil democratic. -- so they will vote democratic. >> let's talk about the issue of benefits. in 1960, 20% -- of federal spending went to individual spent -- payments. this year, 65% of federal spending goes to individual payments. i would suggest we do have a problem with government -- >> we had a downturn in the economy. we of hard times, p
of the obama administration. if i understand it correctly, i was busy dodging other kinds of projectiles in iraq at the time. if i understand this correctly, this is a deeply idealistic effort to try to say, we are not only going to give money, not only have an impact with a fairly large, civilian assistance program to balance our ongoing military commitment to pakistan, but we are also going to set up a structure or relationship to what is generally called the strategic partnership to try to mbreak out of that pattern. after 2008 and 2009, those of you who knew richard knew the hurricane hit pakistan and there was a set of very ambitious goals that were put in to try to build a long-term commitment to pakistan. i use long-term advisedly. america is focused on the counter-terrorism after post- 9/11. by the almost a pistol logical elements -- epistemological element, this was to balance that short-term set of needs. american safety, the safety of the pack as any people. to balance that with a commitment of long-term stability, and a vision with pakistan of a long-term stability in pakista
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)